Question about self-rating vs. NTRP rating.

I don't have an NTRP rating. But I play in non NTRP leagues and classes that are called 3.5 singles, etc.

I have been a fan of threads here that talk about NTRP ratings vs. self-rating, but I've long wanted to see what a 3.5 NTRP player looks like. I go to youtube and search, but first I'll see a "3.5" that looks much more skilled than I, and the next one I'll look at is a "3.5" that seems to have very little skills.

This is a brief description of specific things that I don't do well, as opposed to most descriptions that offer up what a player does do well.

Despite my vast improvement in the past several months, I still frame hard first serves into the court in front of me or send one to the fence. I don't do it very often anymore, but it does still happen occasionally.

I still misjudge my set up and completely wiff once in awhile.

I still sometimes get completely handcuffed by a hard groundstroke and probably look like a total hack when I do.

I still get lazy or tired with footwork and find myself totally out of position as a winner sails by me....find myself five feet behind the base line when there is no reason in the world other than laziness/tiredness for me to be there.

I still overhead smash into the net sometimes.

I still wimp out on my second serves, even though I don't really resort to "punching it in" anymore.

Even though I am "in" every game I lose, I still fold and lose games that I have game/break points in way too often.

I still haven't learned the fine art of "winning." I can compete. I battle hard, and am a hard out in any single game. But my losses still almost always can be characterized as "much closer than the score indicates."

I still get frustrated and infuriated and usually lose to a lesser player who is good at "pushing."

I don't have an NTRP rating. But I play in non NTRP leagues and classes that are called 3.5 singles, etc.

I have been a fan of threads here that talk about NTRP ratings vs. self-rating, but I've long wanted to see what a 3.5 NTRP player looks like. I go to youtube and search, but first I'll see a "3.5" that looks much more skilled than I, and the next one I'll look at is a "3.5" that seems to have very little skills.

This is a brief description of specific things that I don't do well, as opposed to most descriptions that offer up what a player does do well.

Despite my vast improvement in the past several months, I still frame hard first serves into the court in front of me or send one to the fence. I don't do it very often anymore, but it does still happen occasionally.

I still misjudge my set up and completely wiff once in awhile.

I still sometimes get completely handcuffed by a hard groundstroke and probably look like a total hack when I do.

I still get lazy or tired with footwork and find myself totally out of position as a winner sails by me....find myself five feet behind the base line when there is no reason in the world other than laziness/tiredness for me to be there.

I still overhead smash into the net sometimes.

I still wimp out on my second serves, even though I don't really resort to "punching it in" anymore.

Even though I am "in" every game I lose, I still fold and lose games that I have game/break points in way too often.

I still haven't learned the fine art of "winning." I can compete. I battle hard, and am a hard out in any single game. But my losses still almost always can be characterized as "much closer than the score indicates."

I still get frustrated and infuriated and usually lose to a lesser player who is good at "pushing."

In addition, if any of you more knowledgable peeps' can post a video of what an actual NTRP 3.5 looks like, I'd be very grateful.

TIA.

Click to expand...

^^^ a lot of 4.0, 4.5 + players do the same things.

You will never get a definitive video of what a "actual NTRP 3.5 " looks like. 3.5 is a wide ranging level of skill and technique. People with ugly technique can win with consistency and are indeed legitimate 3.5s even though they may look like 3.0s. People who look like 4.0-4.5 level players can be 3.5s because they can't keep the ball in the court. In reality it doesn't really even matter. The numbers and cutoffs are arbitrary. They are only meaningful in the context local league or tournament or club you are playing .

You will never get a definitive video of what a "actual NTRP 3.5 " looks like. 3.5 is a wide ranging level of skill and technique. People with ugly technique can win with consistency and are indeed legitimate 3.5s even though they may look like 3.0s. People who look like 4.0-4.5 level players can be 3.5s because they can't keep the ball in the court. In reality it doesn't really even matter. The numbers and cutoffs are arbitrary. They are only meaningful in the context local league or tournament or club you are playing .

Click to expand...

Thank you for your response....good, meaningful info'. I'm finding that the "consistency" of being a better player and doing these things less often is coming incrementally, but it is coming.

In addition to what goober said which I completely agree with, an NTRP rating is ultimately based on results against other NTRP-rated players. No NTRP points are assigned for style that I know of so watching video can be misleading. Only results matter.

Are there no 3.5 NTRP players in your non NTRP leagues and classes that you could look at and/or hit with?

If you want to know your NTRP rating, here is what you go. Find a computer-rated 3.5 and play them in singles. If you lose by a lot (you win 0-3 games), you are a 3.0. If you lose a close one/win a close one, you are a 3.5. If you win by a lot (you lose 0-3 games), you are a 4.0. If obviously depends on if you play a good 3.5 or a lower 3.5, but that should give you a rough estimate. And style points and individual strokes mean nothing, only results matter. I've seen super athletic people with big strokes who lose all the time at 3.5. I've seen old, unathletic people with ugly strokes win at 4.5.

To me, when I see a true 3.5 player (ie will be a 3.5 forever) I picture someone that bears absolutely no resemblance to tennis that would be seen on TV.

If they are fit, they have bad strokes. If they have a good forehand, their backhand is terrible. If they have a good backhand, their serve is a lollipop. If they have good footwork, their swings are slow and without pace.

Reason being is that if they were fit, had decent and reliable strokes, a serviceable backhand and a respectable serve, and any signifigant pace on their shots....they'd be a 4.0 or better.

So, for anyone with an average base of athleticism I would start there: fitness, strokes, serve, and power. If you have 3 out of the 4, you might be better than a 3.5. 2 out of 4 and its unlikely you'll be seen as a sandbagger.

To me, when I see a true 3.5 player (ie will be a 3.5 forever) I picture someone that bears absolutely no resemblance to tennis that would be seen on TV.

If they are fit, they have bad strokes. If they have a good forehand, their backhand is terrible. If they have a good backhand, their serve is a lollipop. If they have good footwork, their swings are slow and without pace.

Reason being is that if they were fit, had decent and reliable strokes, a serviceable backhand and a respectable serve, and any signifigant pace on their shots....they'd be a 4.0 or better.

So, for anyone with an average base of athleticism I would start there: fitness, strokes, serve, and power. If you have 3 out of the 4, you might be better than a 3.5. 2 out of 4 and its unlikely you'll be seen as a sandbagger.

Click to expand...

Just read this and it's mostly true. However, I feel like some 3.5's can remain at 3.5 and "look like what's on TV" due to getting up there in age or being ok in all aspects but just not having a solid game or being weak mentally. That's what I've observed playing 3.5 this season as a huge sandbagger, but for the most part, floridatennisdude is right on.

If you dont know about NTRP, rate low. Do not read the "NTRP guidelines" unless you just want to punish yourself for a few years. Bottom line is:

-Rating low means you can move up easily, willingly.
-Rating high means you will have to kick, scream, moan, lose, appeal, beg, steal and borrow to come down.

If you self-rate at 3.5, but immediately appeal down to a 3.0 you will probably be ok. If you play one season of 3.5 and one season of 7.0 you will make it dramatically harder to come down even if you managed to lose every single one. If you're a "S" rate and you go... 0W-10L but lost all of those "very close" I dont think they will grant your appeal down to 3.0, but I suppose its possible, but why risk it?

Answer the questions truthfully. You do not want to screw yourself and your team by getting DQ'ed because you lied about something.

When they ask you about "playing high school tennis" they mean playing on a team. Do not answer "yes" to this if you were just goofing off in high school unless you're extremely confident in being able to play 3.5 because that's your minimum rating IIRC.

From your description of yourself I would say try "3.0" if there is a league in your area. Double faulting is almost not acceptable at any level, nor is missing easy put aways more often than not. All of these things are relative to level of course, but if you're doubling on second serve "punches" as you call them, or whiffing floaters at the net, you will have a lot of trouble in 3.5.

If pushers still frustrate you, you will have problems in low levels of tennis. Learning to beat them is almost like a right of passage, regardless of how you achieve it. Facing a pusher is great for temperament and great for consistency. People look down on pushers. That's exactly why they lose. If you respect a pushers game, and dont let your temperament and inconsistencies get you, you can beat them every time.

To me, when I see a true 3.5 player (ie will be a 3.5 forever) I picture someone that bears absolutely no resemblance to tennis that would be seen on TV.

If they are fit, they have bad strokes. If they have a good forehand, their backhand is terrible. If they have a good backhand, their serve is a lollipop. If they have good footwork, their swings are slow and without pace.

Reason being is that if they were fit, had decent and reliable strokes, a serviceable backhand and a respectable serve, and any signifigant pace on their shots....they'd be a 4.0 or better.

So, for anyone with an average base of athleticism I would start there: fitness, strokes, serve, and power. If you have 3 out of the 4, you might be better than a 3.5. 2 out of 4 and its unlikely you'll be seen as a sandbagger.

Click to expand...

This is what I was looking for. That helps tremendously...a real world yardstick that I can understand.

Fitness: Recently lost 25 pounds, but still have about 15 before I would consider myself in prime tennis shape. For 5-10, 195 and 46yo, I move pretty well, but I could definitely be better.

Strokes: Improving, but I still do some ugly things with some shots that come my way....haha. Most times I'm fundamentally sound, but there are still lapses. My backhand is way weaker than my forehand.

Serves: No longer lollipops, but not devastating either. I've worked on this more than anything and it's really coming along.

Power: This I need to develop. I've just started learning to consistently be able to hit groundstrokes hard and deep, but I still do plenty of looping defense on tougher shots.

This is what I was looking for. That helps tremendously...a real world yardstick that I can understand.

Fitness: Recently lost 25 pounds, but still have about 15 before I would consider myself in prime tennis shape. For 5-10, 195 and 46yo, I move pretty well, but I could definitely be better.

Strokes: Improving, but I still do some ugly things with some shots that come my way....haha. Most times I'm fundamentally sound, but there are still lapses. My backhand is way weaker than my forehand.

Serves: No longer lollipops, but not devastating either. I've worked on this more than anything and it's really coming along.

Power: This I need to develop. I've just started learning to consistently be able to hit groundstrokes hard and deep, but I still do plenty of looping defense on tougher shots.

Click to expand...

I'd think you have 2 options...

Self rate at 3.0 and run the risk of getting DQ'd. 3.0 is ultimately a slower and less athletic version of 3.5.

Self rate at 3.5 and prepare for some lopsided losses to players that look beatable

You sound like the type that will play at 3.5 for a few years and flirt with 4.0 after some experience and expected improvement.

but how do you do in these "3.5 " leagues? If you do well, then you are almost certainly a 3.5. Possibly a lower 3.5, but likely still a 3.5.

Click to expand...

I think the USTA says that a 3.49 would likely beat a 3.01 6-0 6-0... both are still 3.5's... but 6-0 6-0 is a pretty big spanking of a difference. So like Govnor is saying, even if you are losing 6-1 6-2 to rated 3.5's... you are probably still a 3.5 yourself. But if you are beating solid 3.5's (guys that are beating other 3.5's handily) if you are beating them 6-1 6-2, then you might very well be a low 4.0. At least that is what I understand.

I would go out and look for a 3.5 team. If you go out and hit with a few 3.5 teams and no one wants you on the roster then you are a 3.0. I'd be shocked if that was the case- since 3.0 is the lowest functional level for men's tennis then from your description you should be just fine at 3.5.